In Reply to: RE: Ideal frequency response curve posted by Tony Lauck on June 17, 2015 at 14:34:10:
| This does not describe why frequency response in the listener's room at the listening position needs to be rolled off. This depends on understanding how recordings are produced.
Specifically, why do you think the frequency response needs to be rolled off? What's important mechanism, and what isn't?
How much validated by experiments?
This isn't a rhetorical question. I think we all now agree on the phenomeon but I want to know other than "it sounds better", why? What part of measurement and playback which, at least superficially seems to say that we have reproduced the same thing, doesn't actually reproduce the psychoacoustic same perception?
Presumably if we cloned everything about the original and transplanted a new human into that recreation, like an acoustic holodeck, then some version of "flat reproduction" should be correct.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Ideal frequency response curve - DrChaos 10:33:15 06/18/15 (4)
- RE: Ideal frequency response curve - Tony Lauck 12:49:45 06/18/15 (3)
- RE: Ideal frequency response curve - throwback 05:50:05 06/19/15 (2)
- RE: Ideal frequency response curve - Tony Lauck 06:55:21 06/19/15 (1)
- RE: The banning of instruments - genungo 07:55:05 06/19/15 (0)